Connect with us

Reviews

Review: ‘Saint Maud’ A Sinner’s Ecstasy

Published

on

Rose Glass’s directorial feature debut Saint Maud (2019) is a clever arthouse horror that deals with faith, death, and life’s purpose. The film shows us twisted realities and fantasies through the pious Maud, a mousy caretaker with a mysterious past, keeping us on the edge of our seats until the final, shocking shot. Complete with disorienting camera angles, slow yet enticing plot reveals, and intense interiority, Saint Maud is overall a wonderful trip into faith and psyche.

According to an interview with Vulture, Glass sees a direct relationship between Maud’s faith and psychosis. Such a relationship obviously spurred some harsh criticism, but the director, coming from a Catholic background herself, sees the danger in conflating the two. They are separate experiences, and while a person may descend from one into the other, “There’s always a long, complicated series of events” that leads from religion to “terrible things,” says Glass. Saint Maud takes us through that series of events.

For much of the film, Maud takes care of Amanda, a formerly illustrious dancer played by Jennifer Ehle. Maud, as we know, is fervently religious, but Amanda is an atheist. Right away, this causes friction. Maud is not content with her own observance; no, she must convert the nonbeliever as well. She soon sets out to save the sinner’s soul and consequently oversteps all rational boundaries. Amanda feigns interest at first, even gifting her caretaker a book about the painter and artist William Blake with a note saying, “My saviour.” But who is the savior? Is it Maud, the observant Christian, or Blake, who rejected all organized religion? However, as all things must end, the relationship turns sour, and Amanda reveals her true disbelief.

Depicting mental illness is, clearly and rightfully, tricky. We don’t want to villainize those who struggle, but we shouldn’t put them on the pedestal of more-than-human either. To make the situation more complex, we can add religion. Saint Maud walks the shaky line of showcasing a character with both a strong sense of faith and strong delusions. Importantly, Glass states, “It’s a lazy and quite dangerous way of thinking, to dismiss people who do terrible things as just inherently bad or mad people.” As such, there is nuance in Maud. Her faith doesn’t stem from mental illness, and her mental illness doesn’t come from her faith. They are disparate entities that happen to collide. It is intimated that Maud turned to religion when she was suffering, alone, and desperate. Just as it happens for many people, religion saved her, giving her hope and a reason to go on. What worked for her, Maud thinks, must work for others too, right? And what better way to honor G-d than to show more people the light? Of course, what Maud doesn’t consider is that not everyone wants redemption, let alone believes in it. Where do we go from there?

One of the most chilling lines is from Maud’s head, when she is alone, thinking of the trials she has undergone for her deity. The voiceover says, “If this is how you treat your most loyal subjects, I shudder to think of how you treat those who shun you.” This shows that Maud is religious not due to the promise of love, but because of the threat of punishment. She is willing to physically harm herself quite severely if those pains will grant her G-d’s favor. It is a selfish view, not actually concerned with the spiritual well-being of others. This poses the question of how much faith is based in self-preservation and how much is truly wholehearted love.

Advertisement

Saint Maud raises complex questions about the nature of religion without completely discounting the valid experiences of believers. I understand how some critics interpret the film, particularly the ending, as disparaging to faith, but I don’t agree with them. Blind faith, in my opinion, is not true. If we don’t question what we follow, if we don’t assess the rules for ourselves, then how do we know we are following the righteous path? Maud can be seen as a zealot, unwavering in her belief and intolerant of any and all dissenters. I can write a whole treatise on intolerance, but it’s been done before and it’s not why I’m writing this review. I’m writing to encourage you to watch a movie that will, hopefully, spur some new thoughts while providing a thrill.

Amanda Nevada DeMel is a born-and-raised New Yorker, though she currently lives in New Jersey. Her favorite genre is horror, thanks to careful cultivation from her father. She especially appreciates media that can simultaneously scare her and make her cry. Amanda also loves reptiles, musicals, and breakfast foods.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Reviews

[REVIEW] The Skiing Slasher ‘Iced’ (1988) Provides Chills, If Not Thrills

Hell hath frozen over here at Horror Press, and as one of the world’s premiere 1980s slasher obsessives, I thought this might be the perfect time to crack into my unwatched VHS of the 1988 skiing slasher Iced. Here’s the gist. Four years after their friend Jeff (Dan Smith) dies in a skiing accident, a group of friends (Doug Stevenson, Debra De Liso, John C. Cooke, Elizabeth Gorcey, Michael Picardi, Ron Kologie, and the original Wednesday Addams, Lisa Loring) is invited to the swanky Snow Peak skiing community for a vacation. Isolated and surrounded by snow, they begin to be hunted by a killer wearing Jeff’s cracked ski mask, who blames them for the accident. Is it Jeff? Or is it someone else seeking revenge? 

Published

on

Hell hath frozen over here at Horror Press, and as one of the world’s premiere 1980s slasher obsessives, I thought this might be the perfect time to crack into my unwatched VHS of the 1988 skiing slasher Iced. Here’s the gist. Four years after their friend Jeff (Dan Smith) dies in a skiing accident, a group of friends (Doug Stevenson, Debra De Liso, John C. Cooke, Elizabeth Gorcey, Michael Picardi, Ron Kologie, and the original Wednesday Addams, Lisa Loring) is invited to the swanky Snow Peak skiing community for a vacation. Isolated and surrounded by snow, they begin to be hunted by a killer wearing Jeff’s cracked ski mask, who blames them for the accident. Is it Jeff? Or is it someone else seeking revenge? 

Is Iced a Good Slasher Movie?

Unfortunately, like many meat-and-potatoes slasher movies of the late 1980s, Iced does not have much to offer the seasoned horror fan. The acting ranges from competent (hi, Lisa Loring) to absolutely abysmal, averaging out much closer to abysmal than not. The real estate agent Alex Bourne (played by the movie’s screenwriter, Joseph Alan Johnson), in particular, is a disastrously beige nonentity.

The movie’s pacing and structure are also baffling. There are almost no murders beyond the opening kill for a good half of Iced’s runtime, forcing you to spend time watching this group of people have a mediocre ski vacation where they’re constantly sniping at one another and not doing much else. When the kills do come, they zip past you at a too-rapid clip, hardly giving you time to pay proper attention to them, like chocolates on the conveyor belt in I Love Lucy.

There is next to no tension-building in the movie because of this, just a lurching sort of stop-start motion that will make you seasick. By far, the most exciting and visceral moment of the movie is a scene where a character is wandering around in the dark and bangs his shin on a coffee table.

Tragically, the skiing is also not that thrilling to watch. While it’s competently shot, enough to be legible, it seems to be beyond the limits of director Jeff Kwitney to turn it into something propulsive and exciting. Thankfully, the movie pretty much forgets about skiing after the first act, anyway.

Advertisement

What Does Iced Do Well?

Although the sum of its parts is pure blandness, there is plenty that Iced does quite well. For instance, the movie was shot in Utah and thus comes by its iciness naturally (sorry, Jack Frost, California doesn’t quite cut it), crafting a unique setting for a late-period slasher with a frigid, moody atmosphere. I’m also a sucker for themed kills, and the use of a ski pole, an icicle, a snowplow, and a hot tub do a lot to spice up the proceedings.

For the gorehounds in the audience, only one of the kills is particularly bloody, though they are nearly all well-rendered by their own standards (there’s an electrocution that relies on performance rather than effects, for instance, and does stick the landing). And even the offscreen or underwhelming kills end up being useful in the Final Girl sequence, when their frozen bodies provide a gruesome and effectively bleak tableau.

As far as exploitation movies go, Iced also has quite a bit to offer on that front. Nearly every member of the cast takes off all their clothes at one point or another, chilliness be damned, and there is a reasonably equitable division of male and female characters wandering around bare-chested, which always feels shockingly progressive when you’re watching a 1980s slasher. Plus, the sequence that is the most undignified (a topless corpse is seen with snow piled on her breasts) actually works for the tone, as the indignity makes her death feel that much more tragic, while the piled snow emphasizes how impossibly long the character has been exposed to the elements.

What else is good? Well… The killer’s POV is depicted by showing a view through the cracks in Jeff’s visor, which provides a neat new image for a type of shot that is otherwise pretty standard for a slasher movie.

However, Iced ultimately exists in this nether space between interesting and boring where it never particularly feels like a slog, but is oh-so withholding when it comes to meting out exciting moments. I’ve seen dozens of slashers that are much, much worse, so it’s hard to get angry about what this 1988 entry is bringing to the table. That said, this one is only for die-hard fans of the subgenre, or for people who desperately need a snowy horror fix and have already seen everything else from The Shining to Wind Chill.

Advertisement

Score: 4/10

Continue Reading

Reviews

[Review] The Thrills and Kills of ‘Ils’ (2006)

Ils follows school teacher Clémentine (Olivia Bonamy) and her boyfriend Lucas (Michaël Cohen), who recently relocated from France to a remote McMansion in Romania. Clémentine arrives home one night after work to a normal evening. She and Lucas eat dinner, watch TV, flirt a bit, and head to bed. That evening, while they’re asleep, Clémentine hears a noise outside. They go to investigate, which turns out to be the wrong move. The couple soon realizes the noise outside has made its way inside. A cat-and-mouse game ensues, forcing Clémentine and Lucas to do anything they can to survive the night. But it soon comes to light the thing inside might actually be things.

Published

on

Author’s Note: It’s really difficult to talk about this film without spoiling who/what the killers are, so be warned.

As someone who lives alone, home invasion films have started to really get under my skin. Thinking that someone could break into the room in my basement apartment that I don’t use, and is street-facing, killing me, and then escaping, frightens me. Plus, there are no cameras around my building, and the windows don’t even lock properly. Okay, I’m going to shut up about that. But that doesn’t negate the fact that home invasion films get to me now. So, naturally, when researching some New French Extremity films for November, I figured I should finally break the seal and watch Ils, as it’s known in the States, Them.

Ils follows school teacher Clémentine (Olivia Bonamy) and her boyfriend Lucas (Michaël Cohen), who recently relocated from France to a remote McMansion in Romania. Clémentine arrives home one night after work to a normal evening. She and Lucas eat dinner, watch TV, flirt a bit, and head to bed. That evening, while they’re asleep, Clémentine hears a noise outside. They go to investigate, which turns out to be the wrong move. The couple soon realizes the noise outside has made its way inside. A cat-and-mouse game ensues, forcing Clémentine and Lucas to do anything they can to survive the night. But it soon comes to light the thing inside might actually be things.

Supposedly, this film is based on true events. If IMDb Trivia is to be taken at face value, then this film is based on a couple that a group of teenagers brutally murdered. In retrospect, it’s difficult to believe a group of kids pulled this all off. Take the cold open of the film. There is a mother and daughter involved in a single-car crash. The mother goes to check under the hood and disappears. This leads her daughter to lock the doors. In a few seconds, the car’s hood is slammed shut, mud is slung at the car from both sides, and the street light goes out. So, knowing that teenagers are the ones to blame for this, it seems a bit far-fetched. Especially when we eventually see the kids. We’re supposed to believe they’re teenagers, but they look between the ages of eight and ten.

The film works best when it blends the line between natural and supernatural, and when it seems like there is only one antagonist inside. Writer/directors David Moreau and Xavier Palud can’t find their footing with what type of story they want to tell. Ils would have worked much better as a supernatural horror film rather than a home invasion film with teenagers. When Ils makes you question what lurks within the house is when it works best. The big reveal at the end feels a bit forced. Part of me wishes Moreau and Palud had taken the idea on which they based their story and gone the supernatural route.

Advertisement

That being said, the cat-and-mouse aspect of Ils is the most enjoyable. When Lucas is taken out of commission, Clémentine is forced to take matters into her own hands. Clémentine is fascinating to watch and makes, what feels like, choices anyone else would make. Her reactions feel more authentic than the actions people usually take in horror films. But there’s still something that feels off and stale about this movie. At just 74 minutes, Ils feels like it rolls the credits before it really gets going.

Many people consider this film New French Extremity, and I can understand that. Would I consider it NFE? No. This is just a plain home invasion horror film. The violence, setting, and action do nothing to classify that as extreme in any sense. Is it scary? Sure! Is the [limited] violence painful to watch? You bet! But it doesn’t push any boundaries or set out to tell something deeper than it does. Ils isn’t a bad film, but it’s far from being a great film.

Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria
Advertisement
Advertisement